About your Search

20130318
20130326
Search Results 0 to 8 of about 9 (some duplicates have been removed)
because of the negotiations over the debt ceiling. the administration wanted to clean increase in the debt ceiling. when we were facing a potential disaster because of reluctance on the part of congress to raise the debt ceiling. we saw a solution which we hope would not be put in place. no one expected it to be put in place. the idea was to have a commitment mechanism we wouldn't need to force us to make better policy decisions on the sequester. and in the negotiations, what i was referring to was the fiscal cliff negotiations at the end of last year, where the matters were very close. the president did not ask for more revenue in those negotiations. he actually asked for less. he had 1.6 trillion in his budget, came down to 1.2 trillion. i will point out charlie the president has done unusual he's kept his last offer on the table. he didn't retreat and say no i want to go back to that original figure. he kept some very difficult offers on the table to reach a bargain, including entitlement reforms. and so the president has been looking for a balanced way to do this. and in some sense it'
-- the sequester was terrible. it was only done as a result of the republican blackmail on the debt ceiling. we increased the debt ceiling. people do not understand what that is. it is foreiling says money you have already spent. if you owe money, you cannot pay the bills. you have to pay the bills. otherwise the country defaults. the treasury people tell us that would be catastrophic. so you have to pay the bills. we have raised the debt ceiling 77 signs -- times since world war ii. there is political demagoguery from whatever clinical party was in go the minority. at the end, there was a vote for it. they say if you increase the debt ceiling coming up to cut spending by an incredible amount. over 10 years. white 10 years? arbitrary. -- why over 10 years? arbitrary. 2.4 congress voted for $ trillion in cuts. 2 trillion -- the sequester makes no sense at all. from our point of view, we do not have a that crisis or deficit crisis. we have a jobs crisis. we have reduced the deficit. the only intelligent way to measure deficit is as a percent of the economy. . percent of gdp that is for a simple r
for the upcoming battle over the next round of negotiations on the debt ceiling, which i think both republicans in the house and the democrats in the senate and the white house are going to say, you know, again try to find -- could they reach a grand bargain, any kind of bargain not only to raise the debt ceiling but bring down the deficit long term. the democrat budget, of course, talks about a big tax hike over ten years of about $1 trillion. republicans say they're not going to do that. they want to roll back obama care. these are the two outside extreme positions. that's where we're at now. going forward can they come together and find some middle ground? >> weigh in on that, lauren. is there really a chance for reconciling these two extreme budgets? >> i think david kind of nailed it here. when it comes to the budgets, they're just a little bit too far, but this budget process isn't a waste of time. i think it's promising that they went through regular order. this is something that the senate hasn't done. they haven't passed a budget this a long time. i think what we'll see is this may ope
to medicare as well. a lot of differences and we have another deadline coming up. the debt ceiling will have to be revisited this summer, alex. >> looking forward to that. >> reporter: yeah, we all are. >> thank you very much, kristen welker. >>> joining me right now, andy sullivan and ann palmer. ann, i'll begin with you. the president is back from the middle east. the reviews are out there. how are you getting the word in terms of how he was perceived? >> i think one of the key things you can look at is what the israeli press put out in the days following his first steps and throughout the entire visit and it was a resounding applause. he got very good praise from them. obviously from what he was trying to do was take that frosty relationship with benjamin netanyahu and try to piece it back together. he did that. it was exactly what he needed to do. there wasn't a lot of meat on the bones in terms of policy but from what he set out to do, that was kind of a mission accomplished. >> i have to say i get a chuckle. he said shalom. andy, the big picture there. what did the president accomplish
required and order to raise taxes or to break the debt ceiling that we have, to increase the debt ceiling. if we do that, if we put a balanced budget amendment on the floor of the house and senate and if it passes i'll be ready to look at increasing the debt ceiling for the president. if that doesn't happen, i don't see a reason to raise the debt ceiling. let's stare him down on that until somebody gives in. we need to get this spending under control. and the irresponsible policies is not the way to go. obamacare needs to be repealed. we need to restore the rule of law in this country. we got to shrink down the welfare package that's out here. 80 different means tested welfare programs in the united states, just $2.5 trillion for the illegal component of this. a whole lot more if we don't get these entitlements under control. mr. speaker, the solutions are here. they are on this side of the aisle. they're actually in the platform. i endorse many of them. i appreciate your attention and i yield back the balance of my ime. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back his time. does th
debt ceiling issues and then our -- obviously, o national debt and deficits -- neil: are they whistling past the graveyard? >> we'll have an adjustment. i hope not. i hope we continue to build incomes up, keep the corporate profits up, but unless we reform the tax code, unless we reform, obviously, the entitlement programs, unless we get debt and deficit and fiscal issues under control, we're in trouble. neil: senator, i thought you were swimming upstream in massachusetts. amazing, ted kennedy's seat, shocking, actually. maybe you set sights on a national stage where your argument resinates more among folks in the country. are you interested in that? >> i think you need people like me and others. you have rubio, portman, thune, good republicans, a lot of good democrats who bring a common sense approach to who we are -- neil: i know that, but would you specifically, scott brown? >> i'm not ruling anything out, but now i'm happy and honored to be a fox contributor. i'll recharge engines and bring my message to the american people and remind them and challenge them -- i want to challenge t
: there are all kinds of fiscal issues with the budget, with sequester and the debt ceiling, not far off. have you offered a number of ways that you think the federal government could be cutting back. your office is good at looking at budgets and plans. you have note aid number of things that could have been done n. liu of closing the white house to public visitors, but did you have bipartisan crossover. >> i had bipartisan crossover because they're getting ready to run for election. there is a game play in the senate. this administration wants to show the american public that we can't cut $44 billion between now and september 30 without them experiencing massive pain. they have every intention to make it hurt to get the point that we need to spends every penny we are spending. which is absolutely ludicrous. it's a shame they are doing that because a lot of things -- we are going to have air traffic control towers shut down. they are not shut down because they are too expensive. on average, they cost $wo.3 million less per year to operate. they are shut down to come back with unionized employees i
the debt ceiling is hit. i think that's the most fertile time for us. i think what republicans want to see, wolf, they want to see a 75-year actuary soundness. we want to make sure the programs are going to be there for the future. the president knows we want to make sure these programs are there, and what the presidents wants, obviously, is some additional revenue. i believe there's a possibility if we could get the 75-year soundness on medicare and social security with appropriate changes and reforms, i think there may be a way through full tax reform to do something that will generate revenue and fit the needs of both sides, and that's what i'm hopeful is going to happen over the next four months. look, there's no negotiation that's happening right now. there's some general discussions that have taken place, but i think the environment is going to be the best that it's been in the next several months. >> just to be precise, under certain circumstances to save social security and medicare over 75 years, you'd be willing to raise tax revenue. do you have a number, two to one, three to one
Search Results 0 to 8 of about 9 (some duplicates have been removed)